Locke and Load: The Fatal Error of the ‘Stand Your Ground’ Philosophy

[DanTex]

Interesting article about the philosophical underpinnings and implications of "Stand Your Ground".

...
Proponents and defenders of Stand Your Ground effectively wish to return us to a State of Nature and its attendant “Inconveniences” — and dangers. LaPierre urges individuals to presume the worst about supposed assailants — damn the consequences. As Locke has it, however, civil society is characterized by a departure from such presumption. When individuals feel such strong passions — anger, fear, hatred — and are liable to act irrationally and regrettably, that is precisely when they must be prevented, as far as possible, from wielding definitive force. And they must be thus prevented in order to honor and promote the instinct for justice surging through us. This is the critical role that civil society plays; for Locke, it perfects nature.

Gun rights advocates argue that we must arm more people, and empower them to wield their guns confidently and boldly if we would achieve greater law and order. They have it wrong. More guns, and more emboldened gun owners, lead to more travesties of justice, more chaos, vendettas, a state of war, Locke would say. Ironically, this also defeats the other cause célèbre of the gun rights movement: autonomy. For gun rights advocates, the gun is the premier mark of individual sovereignty. I believe this is what makes the gun rights movement especially intoxicating for millions of Americans, and resistant to reform and regulation. However, autonomy is doomed in a Stand Your Ground world. It makes no sense to speak of autonomy, freedom, or self-determination in a state of war. As Locke knew too well, the sovereignty of the individual is intolerably tenuous where all are sovereign. Of course, this suits the N.R.A. just fine, and the industry whose interests it represents.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/23/locke-and-load-the-fatal-error-of-the-stand-your-ground-philosophy/?hp&rref=opinion

[Blue_Tires]

1. Pretty much every "the answer is arming more people" -argument

is rooted in spurring more manufacture and sales of guns/ammo...Nothing more...

If they don't keep people scared into continually buying, the industry collapses under its own weight overnight...

[Bandit]

2. If having more guns makes us safer then America should be the Safest country in the world.

[moondust]

3. Indeed.

Dunn is a good example of the many people who harbor deep prejudices and distorted thoughts about the world around them, sometimes further distorted by alcohol or prescription medications or stress at work or road rage or a messy divorce or Fox News propaganda or a million other things.

Circulating lots of guns in a general population is a prescription for murder and mayhem. Most civilized countries know this and don't allow it.